Quote from: gembitz on November 17, 2019, 07:47:12 PM

Quote from: IncludeBeer on November 17, 2019, 06:23:27 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 17, 2019, 10:50:47 AM

Quote from: IncludeBeer on November 17, 2019, 08:52:10 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 17, 2019, 08:09:28 AM

Quote from: IncludeBeer on November 16, 2019, 09:51:53 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 16, 2019, 05:38:25 AM

Quote from: EmilioMann on November 15, 2019, 07:54:16 PM

Quote from: wwzsocki on November 15, 2019, 11:28:18 AM

In my opinion, Decred was always a decent project with a dedicated team.

We can see that the development is ongoing and lately we have some strong moves upwards price wise and that is why I started to wonder what is so special about Decred, despite this what I have already mentioned?

There are other better, faster and cheaper altcoins that already are used for transfers, we have BTC which has found a place as digital gold and safe haven and to be honest I don't hear anything about Decred implementations or use cases?

Community governance sounds very good and to be honest, on this hype Decred makes his way to the top 50 on CMC, but what is the future for Decred?

You didn't say anything about privacy and the lightning network that is already implemented in v1.5 release candidadate1 recently released

EDIT: There is no other currency as safe against attacks as decred.
DCR is more safe than bitcoin
The governance system through politeia allows any new feature on market to be implemented if the stakeholders wish.

On-chain governance system works until a motivated minority stops following the majority. Remember, changes in the network are permanent. What happens if there's a group dedicated enough not to accept those changes?

Dedicated minorities don't mean beans for Decred Cheesy

Chain splits like what happened with BTC/BCH and ETH/ETC can't happen in Decred (next to impossible). Check out my earlier post for sauce:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1290358.msg52950978#msg52950978

Can't happen? What if there was a motivated minority that didn't want the "new feature" in an upgrade? What if the majority already voted in 1GB blocks, and the minority didn't want it? What if the miners need to change the supply cap to support their costs, and the majority voted for it, but the minority didn't want it?

What would happen to the minority? They wouldn't have the ability to fork, and split away?

Unless a "minority" has sufficient voting power in the form of staked tickets, then no, they can't create a contentious hard fork. Decred is specifically designed to make contentious forks unprofitable, and in fact, costly for a minority to continue operating.
If some group doesn't ultimately agree with the majority of stakeholders, they can fork the github repo, rename it, and release their own coin.

That said, I'm pretty sure Politeia has a 60/40 approval threshold on proposals.

Or rename it to Decred Classic, "the real for-the-community Decred". I'm not sure of what's technically possible, but that was the point of the debate. On-chain governance can't stop a community of different standpoints from breaking apart, and splitting away.

There's one very important nuance though, and that's the difference between a forked repo, and a forked chain. A forked chain that has a contentious hard fork growing on it shares the same previous block history as the "legit" chain.
A forked repo doesn't. The only thing it shares with the "legit" chain is some subset of the source code, and we all know that a successful crypto project is WAYYY more than just its source. Bob and Sally can go fork the Decred repo and name their coin Decred Classic if they wish, but nothing in that chain history will show anything of Decred. It would in fact, just be some other crypto coin. And history has shown us already: copy pasta crypto coins are rarely more than a scam. The market doesn't usually acknowledge such coins. Cheesy

without replay protection ~ what makes you think the original chain nodes will not be sybil attacked via malicious state actors?

weeee

Without PoS votes on the validity of contentious blocks, a sybil attack isn't an actual attack vector in this scenario.
Try again Gem Cheesy